Narrareach

Queue an article draft

queue_article_draft

Have Narrareach write a brief into a full first draft in the writer's voice. It is written in the background and saved to their Drafts as an article; the writer also gets an email when it is ready. The draft never invents the writer's own experiences or numbers: where the piece needs them, it leaves a marked "[Your experience: …]" prompt for the writer to fill. Poll get_article_brief until status is READY. Each draft counts toward the plan's monthly draft allowance (8 on Revenue Writer, 30 on Full Agentic); a failed draft does not count and can be queued again. Counts as five requests against the rate limit.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "briefId": "<briefId>"
    },
    "name": "queue_article_draft"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`briefId`	Yes	A brief id from generate_article_briefs or list_article_briefs.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`brief`	Yes
`draftAllowance`	Yes
`connectedAccount`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Beyond the annotations (readOnly=false, idempotent=false, destructive=false), the description discloses async background execution, where output lands (Drafts as an article), email notification, an anti-hallucination behavior (marked prompts for personal experience/numbers), billing/quota effects, and rate-limit cost. This is exactly the behavioral context annotations cannot express.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The action is front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by tightly ordered facts: async behavior, storage/notification, content guardrail, polling instruction, quota rules, and rate-limit cost. Every sentence carries operational value with no filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a single-parameter, non-destructive, non-idempotent mutation with an output schema and full annotations, the description covers the remaining gaps an agent needs: how it runs, where results appear, when to poll, failure/retry behavior, and cost. Nothing material is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% for the single briefId parameter and already documents its source and length constraints. The description corroborates the parameter's role implicitly ('write a brief into a full first draft') but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Have Narrareach write a brief into a full first draft in the writer's voice.' It clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings by tying input to generate_article_briefs/list_article_briefs and contrasting with get_article_brief (polling) and schedule_article (publishing).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives explicit operating procedure: call it against a brief, then 'Poll get_article_brief until status is READY.' It also states the failure path ('a failed draft does not count and can be queued again') and cost context (monthly allowance, five requests against rate limit), leaving little inference needed for when and how to use it.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Narrareach tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?